Konishiroku Hexanon 35mm f/2.8

[Oldhand]

Found recently at a junk store.
I bought it on spec and examined it later.
The aperture blades are sticky and won't close smoothly, otherwise it is in good condition.
No good on my Nikon D300 I am thinking.
What camera or cameras - with a viewfinder - would this lens be suited most easily to for use.
Also - any opinions on this lens - I am not familiar with it.
Thanks
OH

[woodrim]

I think it will require a mirror-less like NEX or a 4/3 due to short registration.

[Attila]

I wish to buy from you, great lens I collect them , don't remember surely I have this pre-set version or not.

To mount you need a rare adapter Konica F -> Konica AR -> Konica -> mirror less camera.

Nikon is hope less, working distance allow may half meter to shoot. Lens register distance is 40,5 Nikon focal plance distance is 45mm.

http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/japenese/konica/konishiroku_hexanon_35mm_f2_8/?

[Excalibur]

The easiest camera would be a film camera

[Attila]

[Excalibur]

[Oldhand]

[Excalibur]

If you want to use a Hexanon lens then I believe trifox might be able to modify them, but if you want to use Hexanon lenses on a digital camera then, what I have read, an Olympus or Nex is suitable....but I'm not an expert on digital gear.

[konicamera]

OH:

The 35/2.8 is one of Konica's longest-standing lens designs. This is a "F" mount lens made sometime between 1960 and 1965. It's 6/5 optical construction lasted well into the "AR" mount period, from 1965, until 1981, when it was discontinued and replaced with a compact model.

By most accounts, the 35/2.8 is a very sharp and contrasty lens, but without any memorable personality traits (unlike the 35/2.0, made from early 1972). It might be somewhat different with the preset models, as they have a 12-blade aperture (I can't remember right now if the "F" mount version has a 12-blade aperture, but the "AR" preset lenses do). The "F" mount lenses also have their own distinct coatings which differ considerably from those on the early "AR" lenses. They have a light blue-grey hue, as opposed to the straw-amber colored coatings of the early "AR" lenses. Strangely enough, the same coatings can be found on the "AR" preset lenses.

In terms of useability on today's digital cameras, as Attila mentioned, finding the "F" to "AR" mount adapter is quite a feat, but it may be useful to remember that the film to flange distance on both mounts is the same (40.5mm), so maybe a way to affix the lens on a regular "AR" mount adapter could be found. The "F" mount diameter is narrow enough to fit inside the "AR" mount with room to spare.

Nice find in elegant looking shape. Congratulations.

[Oldhand]

Thanks chaps for the feedback.
As Attila says: the mounting to mirrorless may be problematic

[peterqd]

[Oldhand]

[peterqd]

[Excalibur]

[Oldhand]

When I was using film I did all my 0wn processing -negative, print and slides.
I d0n't miss it at all.
The biggest advantage 0f digital is the immediate feedback that is available and the 0pp0rtunity t0 re-sh00t as necessary.
The 0bject 0f all ph0t0graphy is the final 0ut0me after all, n0t just the c0llecti0n 0f camera gear.
There are many in 0ur camera club with GAS - gear acquisiti0n syndr0me) - s0mething I d0n't subscribe t0.
If I can use it - well and g00d - if n0t, pass it 0n t s0me0ne wh0 can.

My ap0l0gies - my keyb0ard started t0 die as I was typing this hence the makeshift characters
0H

[woodrim]

[iangreenhalgh1]

[konicamera]

[Excalibur]

[iangreenhalgh1]